2. analog
  3. 179018-11588

What is the “World’s Best Cartridge”?

I believe that a cartridge and a speaker, by far, contribute the most to SQ.

The two transducers in a system.

I bit the bulllet and bought a Lyra Atlas SL for $13K for my Woodsong Garrard 301 with Triplanar SE arm. I use a full function Atma-Sphere MP-1 preamp. My $60K front end. It is certainly, by far, the best I have owned. I read so many comments exclaiming that Lyra as among the best. I had to wait 6 months to get it. But the improvement over my excellent $3K Mayijima Shilabi was spectacular-putting it mildly.

I recently heard a demo of much more pricy system using a $25K cartridge. Seemed to be the most expensive cartridge made. Don’t recall the name.

For sure, the amount of detail was something I never heard. To hear a timpani sound like the real thing was incredible. And so much more! 
This got me thinking of what could be possible with a different kind of cartridge than a moving coil. That is, a moving iron.

I have heard so much about the late Decca London Reference. A MI and a very different take from a MC. Could it be better? The World’s Best? No longer made.

However Grado has been making MI cartridges for decades. Even though they hold the patent for the MC. Recently, Grado came out with their assault on “The World’s Best”. At least their best effort. At $12K the Epoch 3. I bought one and have been using it now for about two weeks replacing my Lyra. There is no question that the Atlas SL is a fabulous cartridge. But the Epoch is even better. Overall, it’s SQ is the closest to real I have heard. To begin, putting the stylus down on the run in grove there is dead silence. As well as the groves between cuts. This silence is indicative of the purity of the music content. Everything I have read about it is true. IME, the comment of one reviewer, “The World’s Best”, may be true.
 

 

mglik
dogberry
630 posts
 

I'll jump in once more. This thread is not about CD vs LP, and any entries of that kind ought to be ignored or deleted.

My opinion is that the new technologies that take the idea of minimising the moving mass on the cantilever are on the right track for ultimate fidelity. I know I'm biased, but the cantileverless Deccas started out in this direction, and the Soundsmith strain gauge and the DS Audio optical cartridges are running with it. The AT Art1000 with the coils right at the distal end of the cantilever is a third approach. It seems to me that only the very best of conventional LOMC pickups might vie with them, but at a much higher price. There is no reason, other than a dislike of losing advertising dollars, why a magazine should not conduct a shootout between these three. I am fairly sure I would not be alone in wanting to read that!

(Yes, it would be better for me to conduct my own comparison, but I'm not made of money and there is no way I could go and hear all three, sadly.)

mijostyn's avatar
mijostyn
8,474 posts
 

@lewm , digital is more accurate. There can be no doubt about this. It is superior in every and all measurable parameters.  This says nothing about "sounding better." Beauty is in the ear of the beholder. 

@rauliruegas , My wood comment pertains to cartridges only. I have owned a Koetsu Rosewood and a Grado Statement. Yes, wood can be treated in a number of ways but it will never be as inert and massive as a metal. Resin treated it can be used effectively in tonearms but I still prefer a metal or fiberglass wand. I have not yet heard an Epoch and at this point have no desire as I have focused on very low impedance moving coils. Like me you think the Ortofon MC Diamond is a killer cartridge design. So, don't give me this BS on wooden cartridges :-)

atmasphere's avatar
atmasphere
11,753 posts
 

digital is more accurate. There can be no doubt about this. It is superior in every and all measurable parameters.  This says nothing about "sounding better." Beauty is in the ear of the beholder. 

Something is keeping current LP sales on the rise. Most of it isn't coming from audiophiles and likely the buyers know nothing of the specs. Usually when a succeeding tech appears it eclipses the prior art which disappears. That's not happened over the last 40 years with the LP so we can safely say digital is an incremental improvement sound-wise as opposed to transformative (disruptive).

IMO the factor is that most people don't ever hear good digital audio (just as most people don't ever get to hear good analog either). Some of the older digital playback gear was pretty dreadful, especially if it was less expensive and my surmise is a lot of that is still in service.  

 

lewm
12,849 posts
 

I think I’ve already said this: CDs and DVDs inevitably bore me. You could say it’s because my Ayre C5Xe-mp CDP isn’t good enough. Top quality LPs kill it. Hi-rez streaming is another matter. That’s where modern digital can shine. But I won’t give up vinyl for streaming because I’ve got so many wonderful LPs, and there’s a certain Zen about playing them that appeals, not to mention the visceral sensation of reality that occasionally occurs. May I be left alone to enjoy? Raul always ends his posts with “enjoy the music “. Yes, do that. Also recognize there are some things that are either unmeasurable or not yet measured.

frogman
7,409 posts
 

Great post, Lewm. I agree on every count; exactly my experience.  

More to discover